Mb civil suit rulings 11/15/2022

[eggbutt]

That’s the thing…SW seems to have two, or more, personalities. Yes, I’ve seen the nasty things she posted in the past but the SW I’ve come to know over the past 4 years is far removed from that persona. It is interesting for sure. I understand others’ distinct dislike for her. I’ve had a different experience. I don’t believe she has shown behavior equally disgusting to LK’s behavior. It is interesting that LK does not seem to have any real life friends while SW does although in some aspects they are very similar.

[Jealoushe]

Is she removed from that persona or is that persona an act?

Anyone who is genuine, kind etc doesn’t act the way SW acts, even if it’s just on the internet. She has caused actual damage to peoples mental state.

[BigMama1]

@CurrentlyHorseless

To be found Guilty, the jury must find both actus reus (guilty act) and mens rea (guilty mind) are present. A defendant is presumed sane unless proven insane by the defense. Barisone was not found Guilty because the defense met its burden in establishing that he was insane

And therefore the judge’s statement that he was found guilty but not criminally responsible is incorrect. That you for confirming what all of us have been saying.

[Warmblood1]

I agree with @BigMama1’s assessment, I think LK and SW are parallel in nature. They will viscously attack others who challenge their own belief system but both present themselves as ultimate victims. I feel they use victimhood as a way to excuse their heinous behavior. Deep down they are aware of their conflicting moral compass but are too righteous and begrudged to change their ways. It cost absolutely nothing to be kind. Those that have no qualms tearing people apart are of no interest to me. I’d rather be alone.

[BigMama1]

@eggbutt

I don’t believe she has shown behavior equally disgusting to LK’s behavior.

She absolutely has. And examples aren’t hard to find if you have time to waste looking. Or you can just believe people who have seen her in action.

I’m sure LK has different personas too and can appear perfectly normal and pleasant. That’s probably how MB got conned into helping her in the first place.

People like SW and LK only look out for themselves. If they are helping someone else, it’s because they benefit in some way. Not telling you to stop interacting with her, but just to be aware of who she is to protect yourself.

[ekat]

@eggbutt

That new wiretapping amendment is a pretty serious deal, isn’t it? How can they wriggle out of addressing it?

Since it’s a new claim, LK, through her attorneys, are going to have to answer it. That answer will be another interesting thing to read.

[trubandloki]

@CurrentlyHorseless

The judge knows the outcome of the criminal case, and specifically cited the civil case as “arising out of” the criminal case.

@CurrentlyHorseless

You have said that the verdict in the criminal trial is irrelevant for the civil trial. Why, then, did the judge state that the civil trial arises out of the criminal trial and state, as fact, that the verdict in the criminal trial indicated that the jury found that MB had committed the actus reus of shooting her twice?

@CurrentlyHorseless

If the outcome of the criminal trial is completely irrelevant, why would the judge state that the civil trial “is arising out of” the criminal trial in which Barisone was found NGRI?

You do realize that the document does not say what you are insisting it says. There is a difference between saying criminal matter and criminal case/trial.

@CurrentlyHorseless

Have you noticed that some of the “legal professionals” weighing in on the judge’s ruling are asserting that the judge is wrong?

Either the judge is wrong or those “legal professionals” are wrong.

Or, you are not truly understanding what is going on with this document, either on purpose or by lack of knowledge, I do not know.

[trubandloki]

@ekat

@eggbutt

That new wiretapping amendment is a pretty serious deal, isn’t it? How can they wriggle out of addressing it?

Since it’s a new claim, LK, through her attorneys, are going to have to answer it. That answer will be another interesting thing to read.

So there will be another filing on the wiretapping claim from the prosecution (Lauren Kanarek’s lawyer)?
Since Lauren has already admitted under oath that she did this, how can they possibly defend it?

[Sdel]

@trubandloki

@ekat

@eggbutt

That new wiretapping amendment is a pretty serious deal, isn’t it? How can they wriggle out of addressing it?

Since it’s a new claim, LK, through her attorneys, are going to have to answer it. That answer will be another interesting thing to read.

So there will be another filing on the wiretapping claim from the prosecution (Lauren Kanarek’s lawyer)?
Since Lauren has already admitted under oath that she did this, how can they possibly defend it?

He’ll probably repeat the assertions we’ve seen here from JK/IM.

[ekat]

@trubandloki

So there will be another filing on the wiretapping claim from the prosecution (Lauren Kanarek’s lawyer)?
Since Lauren has already admitted under oath that she did this, how can they possibly defend it?

I’m pretty sure she’s going to go with public area/no expectation of privacy. And, as the case goes on, I have a feeling we are going to see more litigation about those recordings and that whole idea of public area vs completely illegal.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@lazaret

He’s not. He’s saying the civil trial is arising out of the alleged action for which the defendant was found not guilty. He’s not being sued because of the criminal trial. He’s being sued because plaintiff alleges he injured her, which was also the same allegation the state made in the criminal trial.

ETA: this is literally what he said in the ruling on the motion for leave to amend.

I agree that he’s “being sued because the plaintiff alleges he injured her, which was also the same allegation the state made in the criminal trial.”

In the criminal trial, the defendant was not found Not Guilty. He was found NGRI, which involves the jury in the criminal case finding that he committed the guilty act, ie he shot her.

I think it’s conceivable that the verdict in the criminal trial does not automatically carry over to the civil case, as you assert. However, given the wording the judge used in his ruling, I’m less convinced of that than I was before I read the ruling.

I understand that he was ruling on the various motions before him, and not ruling on the facts of the case. However, I’m surprised an experienced judge would not be careful to write “allegedly” if he considered those facts in dispute.

[Jealoushe]

All this just sounds $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[MHM]

@ekat

And, as the case goes on, I have a feeling we are going to see more litigation about those recordings and that whole idea of public area vs completely illegal.

It’s horrifying to think of the legal bills that will pile up as this whole thing drags on and on and on.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@BigMama1

@CurrentlyHorseless

To be found Guilty, the jury must find both actus reus (guilty act) and mens rea (guilty mind) are present. A defendant is presumed sane unless proven insane by the defense. Barisone was not found Guilty because the defense met its burden in establishing that he was insane

And therefore the judge’s statement that he was found guilty but not criminally responsible is incorrect. That you for confirming what all of us have been saying.

If he had said “guilty of the act” in Latin (actus reus) would you agree that he was correct? Why quibble if he decides to express himself in English rather than Latin?

[DownYonder]

@DownYonder

Question for the legal eagles. Has the meaning of “not guilty by reason of insanity” ever been decided on by a higher court in NJ?

If so, then aren’t the various parties in the civil suit and counterclaims wasting their time and money if they try to argue that issue is at the crux of the litigation?

Yes, I am bumping up my own question. Does anyone know if this type of issue has ever gone before a higher court in New Jersey?

IOW, does NGRI mean (as several posters here continue to stress) that the accused was determined to have committed “the act” (even though they cannot be held criminally responsible because they were also determined to be “insane” at the time of “the act”)?

OR does NGRI mean that because the accused was insane, it therefore is of no [legal] consequence whether he/she committed “the act”?

It seems almost incomprehensible to me that this distinction hasn’t been previously decided by higher courts. Surely this type of conundrum has reared its head before in other civil cases related to criminal acts/alleged criminal acts.

[enjoytheride]

Haven’t we addressed this enough to stop arguing with a brick wall? Let’s move away from the wall

[eggbutt]

Well, for sure it’s known Michael’s office was not a public area and even with the office door open and voices raised in the office, there is no way some dinky recording device hidden in a locker down some stairs near a bench would pick up anything, yet we know she posted verbatim conversations several people had in the office.

How many people lied under oath during the criminal trial, do we have an estimate? I am only aware of two impeached witnesses although I think MH skirted the honest truth when testifying about LK’s riding ability.

[eggbutt]

Three words - Go. Fund. Me.

Maybe that’s why the Kanareks mortgaged the FL home. I wonder if the NJ home was also recently mortgaged? I don’t care enough to research it, just curious.

[trubandloki]

@MHM

@ekat

And, as the case goes on, I have a feeling we are going to see more litigation about those recordings and that whole idea of public area vs completely illegal.

It’s horrifying to think of the legal bills that will pile up as this whole thing drags on and on and on.

It is horrifying! It is for sure horrifying.
That is why LO has the GoFundMe, to be able to pay for all this.
Crazy, it is just crazy.

[eggbutt]

Oxford Dictionary definition of “obtuse” = annoyingly insensitive or slow to understand.